Evapotranspiration predictions: a comparison among GLEAMS , Opus, PRZM-2, and RZWQM models in a humid and thermic climate

Abstract

Environmental fate models are increasingly used to evaluate potential impacts of agrochemicals on water quality to aid in decision making. However, errors in predicting processes like evapotranspiration (ET), which is rarely measured during model validation studies, can significantly affect predictions of chemical fate and transport. This study compared approaches and predictions for ET by GLEAMS, Opus, PRZM-2, and RZWQM and determined effects of the predicted ET on simulations of other hydrology components. The ET was investigated for 2 years of various fallow–corn growing seasons under sprinkler irrigation. The comparison included annual cumulative daily potential ET (ET p), actual ET, and partitioning of total ET between soil evaporation ( E s) and crop transpiration ( E t). When measured pan evaporation was used for calculating ET p (the pan evaporation method), Opus, PRZM-2, and RZWQM predicted 74, 65, and 59%, respectively, of the 10-year average ET reported for a nearby site. When the energy-balance equations were used for calculating ET p (the combination methods), GLEAMS, Opus, PRZM-2, and RZWQM predicted 84, 105, 60, and 72% of the reported ET, respectively. The pan evaporation method predicted a similar amount of ET to the combination methods for bare soil, but predicted less ET when both E s and E t occurred. RZWQM reasonably predicted partitioning of ET to E s, while GLEAMS and Opus over-predicted this partitioning. A close correlation between soil water storage in the root zone and ET suggests that accurate soil water content predictions were fundamental to ET predictions. ©